User Score
6.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 326 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 50 out of 326

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 31, 2011
    5
    Public Enemies is really just another forgettable Gangster movie, with the exception of Johnny Depp there really isn't very much to like about this film.
  2. May 21, 2013
    10
    Honesty is a rare and often sought after trait in any individual, and when we see Johnny Depp portray one of the most notorious criminals in American history, we see exactly what Depression era bank robber John Dillinger was all about, upfront and straight to the point...honest.
    Whether he was a bad person or a man simply following what he was good at is anyones guess, but Michael Mann
    Honesty is a rare and often sought after trait in any individual, and when we see Johnny Depp portray one of the most notorious criminals in American history, we see exactly what Depression era bank robber John Dillinger was all about, upfront and straight to the point...honest.
    Whether he was a bad person or a man simply following what he was good at is anyones guess, but Michael Mann brilliantly focuses on exactly what Dillinger was known for, holding up banks. We don't need a backstory or a setup for how he took on such a job, we just see what we expect to see, but with Dillinger we see someone who isn't someone we would expect.
    After a daring escape from a penitentiary, Dillinger and his friends, including Red (Jason Clarke) and Harry Pierpont (David Wenham), Dillinger is already setting up his next heist, during a great crime wave in the midst of the Depression.
    Dillinger uses his charm to woo Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard) who he is entirely honest with in his robbery prowess. She accepts his life and his determination to be with her, while Dillinger and his friends continue to evade the Bureau of Investigation, leading the hunt is Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) who took down Pretty Boy Floyd and is now on the hunt for Dillinger.
    After several near misses and even a capture, Dillinger brims with confidence at how everyone seems to be at his feet, which Depp perfectly encapsulates. He brings the slick, handsome and straight cut personality to the role that we know from the history of John Dillinger, but with so much more, a scene where he walks freely through the department searching for him is tense, wonderful and also a perfect rendition of how Dillinger liked to live his life. But to quote the film, bank robberies are not getting any easier to pull, and when the Bureau lands down hard, tragedy and blood follow Dillinger wherever he goes. But his only wish is to be with Billie.
    Shot in digital high def, Public Enemies looks truly dazzling, the cinematography added with the intense close-ups create a documentary type feel that is reminiscent of the story that is on show. The big cast includes Channing Tatum, a very underrated yet brilliant turn of J. Edgar Hoover by Billy Crudup, Stephen Dorff, Giovanni Ribisi and Stephen Lang.
    We can only go by what we are told by the history books, but Dillinger was indeed a colourful character nonetheless and Michael Mann has told an excellent story and created a moving and focused film.
    Expand
  3. Nov 24, 2011
    7
    The story wasn't the best, the action was great. Costume and accents where something new as I'm not a fan of the western style movies, but this was not that - it was a gangster style movie. Christian Bale did a great job for his character...
  4. j30
    Oct 10, 2011
    8
    Just a solid picture. Great cast. Cinematography was great. Micheal Mann has a very distinctive style and it really shows in the film.
  5. Aug 18, 2014
    7
    I am not sure why this one is not more critically acclaimed honestly. Johnny Depp is fantastic here, as are Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard, and Jason Clarke. The direction from Michael Mann is great as usual and he does a great job creating great thrills and excitement here. At times, things can get drowned out in a hail of bullets, but for the most part, things are very tense andI am not sure why this one is not more critically acclaimed honestly. Johnny Depp is fantastic here, as are Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard, and Jason Clarke. The direction from Michael Mann is great as usual and he does a great job creating great thrills and excitement here. At times, things can get drowned out in a hail of bullets, but for the most part, things are very tense and exciting. The cinematography is good, the costume design is very good, and the production design is very good. The script is also solid and gets the job done. Now, this is not the best gangster film I have seen, but it is a darn good one and a very entertaining and well done look at the last days of John Dillinger that is bolstered by great direction and acting. Overall, this one is not a great film, but is certainly a good one that did not deserve the mixed reception it received. Expand
  6. Dec 11, 2012
    1
    One of the worst cinematography I've ever seen. They cranked up the sharpen and contrast filters to 11. It is downright un-watchable on a smaller screen with the constantly moving camera and the messed up contrast. I had really hard time distinguishing between a the characters at the beginning, because you only see them for 1 or 2 seconds in dimly lit environments and the camera moves likeOne of the worst cinematography I've ever seen. They cranked up the sharpen and contrast filters to 11. It is downright un-watchable on a smaller screen with the constantly moving camera and the messed up contrast. I had really hard time distinguishing between a the characters at the beginning, because you only see them for 1 or 2 seconds in dimly lit environments and the camera moves like a madman. Expand
  7. May 13, 2013
    10
    I rob banks," John Dillinger would sometimes say by way of introduction. It was the simple truth. That was what he did. For the 13 months between the day he escaped from prison and the night he lay dying in an alley, he robbed banks. It was his lifetime. Michael Mann's "Public Enemies" accepts that stark fact and refuses any temptation to soften it. Dillinger was not a nice man.
    Here is a
    I rob banks," John Dillinger would sometimes say by way of introduction. It was the simple truth. That was what he did. For the 13 months between the day he escaped from prison and the night he lay dying in an alley, he robbed banks. It was his lifetime. Michael Mann's "Public Enemies" accepts that stark fact and refuses any temptation to soften it. Dillinger was not a nice man.
    Here is a film that shrugs off the way we depend on myth to sentimentalize our outlaws. There is no interest here about John Dillinger's childhood, his psychology, his sexuality, his famous charm, his Robin Hood legend. He liked sex, but not as much as robbing banks. "He robbed the bankers but let the customers keep their own money." But whose money was in the banks? He kids around with reporters and lawmen, but that was business. He doesn't kid around with the members of his gang. He might have made a very good military leader.
    Johnny Depp and Michael Mann show us that we didn't know all about Dillinger. We only thought we did. Here is an efficient, disciplined, bold, violent man, driven by compulsions the film wisely declines to explain. His gang members loved the money they were making. Dillinger loved planning the next job. He had no exit strategy or retirement plans.
    Dillinger saw a woman he liked, Billie Frechette, played by Marion Cotillard, and courted her, after his fashion. That is, he took her out at night and bought her a fur coat, as he had seen done in the movies; he had no real adult experience before prison. They had sex, but the movie is not much interested. It is all about his vow to show up for her, to protect her. Against what? Against the danger of being his girl. He allows himself a tiny smile when he gives her the coat, and it is the only vulnerability he shows in the movie.
    This is very disciplined film. You might not think it was possible to make a film about the most famous outlaw of the 1930s without clichés and "star chemistry" and a film class screenplay structure, but Mann does it. He is particular about the way he presents Dillinger and Billie. He sees him and her. Not them. They are never a couple. They are their needs. She needs to be protected, because she is so vulnerable. He needs someone to protect, in order to affirm his invincibility.
    Dillinger hates the system, by which he means prisons, that hold people; banks, that hold money, and cops, who stand in his way. He probably hates the government too, but he doesn't think that big. It is him against them, and the bastards will not, can not, win. There's an extraordinary sequence, apparently based on fact, where Dillinger walks into the "Dillinger Bureau" of the Chicago Police Department and strolls around. Invincible. This is not ego. It is a spell he casts on himself.
    The movie is well-researched, based on the book by Bryan Burrough. It even bothers to try to discover Dillinger's speaking style. Depp looks a lot like him. Mann shot on location in the Crown Point jail, scene of the famous jailbreak with the fake gun. He shot in the Little Bohemia Lodge in the same room Dillinger used, and Depp is costumed in clothes to match those the bank robber left behind. Mann redressed Lincoln Avenue on either side of the Biograph Theater, and laid streetcar tracks; I live a few blocks away, and walked over to marvel at the detail. I saw more than you will; unlike some directors, he doesn't indulge in beauty shots to show off the art direction. It's just there.
    This Johnny Depp performance is something else. For once an actor playing a gangster does not seem to base his performance on movies he has seen. He starts cold. He plays Dillinger as a Fact. My friend Jay Robert Nash says 1930s gangsters copied their styles from the way Hollywood depicted them; screenwriters like Ben Hecht taught them how they spoke. Dillinger was a big movie fan; on the last night of his life, he went to see Clark Gable playing a man a lot like him, but he didn't learn much. No wisecracks, no lingo. Just military precision and an edge of steel.
    Christian Bale plays Melvin Purvis in a similar key. He lives to fight criminals. He is a cold realist. He admires his boss, J. Edgar Hoover, but Hoover is a romantic, dreaming of an FBI of clean-cut young accountants in suits and ties who would be a credit to their mothers. After the catastrophe at Little Bohemia (the FBI let Dillinger escape but killed three civilians), Purvis said to hell with it and made J. Edgar import some lawmen from Arizona who had actually been in gunfights.
    Mann is fearless with his research. If I mention the Lady in Red, Anna Sage (Branka Katic), who betrayed Dillinger outside the Biograph when the movie was over, how do you picture her? I do too. We are wrong. In real life she was wearing a white blouse and an orange skirt, and she does in the movie. John Ford once said, When the legend becomes fact, print the legend. This may be a case where he was right.
    Expand
  8. Sep 26, 2014
    10
    It's like if Leonardo Dicaprio spawned a lovely mix of Big Rigs Over the Road Racing and stuffed it into a pink guys anus. It made me so happy I went to see it, it made me play PayDay 2
  9. Sep 12, 2010
    5
    when i went to see this movie there was just something about it which made it not an enjoyable experience. the story was fine and well in sequence with the events that occurred in real life with a few changes. however there wasn't enough suspense provided especially since most people will have known what would happen. however the acting does save the movie in most points
  10. Nov 12, 2013
    6
    The producers of this film would like you to think it is a modern version of the Untouchables, but anyone who has seen this film will tell you it's far from it. It's not that Public Enemies was a bad movies, but a lot of people panned it because they expected a lot more from a 100 million dollar movie, starting Johnny Depp and Christian Bale, and they have a point. The story was flawedThe producers of this film would like you to think it is a modern version of the Untouchables, but anyone who has seen this film will tell you it's far from it. It's not that Public Enemies was a bad movies, but a lot of people panned it because they expected a lot more from a 100 million dollar movie, starting Johnny Depp and Christian Bale, and they have a point. The story was flawed right from the beginning because the true story behind it really wasn't that interesting. The filmmakers tried to get people to watch it, by saying that Dillinger and Purvis were comparable to Capone and Ness, but that's not true. In reality, they had almost no interaction with each other and in the movie, whenever they were together, all they did was shoot at each other. There wasn't any chemistry between them, because their supposed rivalry was a fictions element added to an otherwise true story. The film should have focused on infamous bank robber, John Dillinger, but instead it focuses on the FBI hunt for him and his life on the run, long after the bulk of his crimes had been committed. Johnny Depp portrays Dillinger in an attempt to go back to being a legitimate actor instead of a Disney puppet, and he fails miserably. This guy can be one hell of actor, when the role fits his personality, but John Dillinger does not. Depp is an emotionless mess of mumbled lines that almost completely destroy the film. Thankfully, Christian Bale was much better and far more interesting. Public Enemies had big expectations, an all-star cast, and a huge budget, but it turned out to be an average film. That's what had people so upset, because had this been an independent film, they would have been okay with it. The fact that Public Enemies was billed as the next Untouchables, but fails to deliver even a single memorable scene just destroys any credibility the film had going for it. Expand
  11. Aug 25, 2014
    6
    I was looking forward to this because I'm a fan of both Depp and Bale (and yes; I recognized David Wenham, too!). All in all I liked the movie, but I also felt mildly disappointed. I had heard from people that "Public Enemies" is good, and maybe I expected too much.

    The acting seemed a little stiff. Johnny Depp's Dillinger was charming, determined, and slightly obsessed with certain
    I was looking forward to this because I'm a fan of both Depp and Bale (and yes; I recognized David Wenham, too!). All in all I liked the movie, but I also felt mildly disappointed. I had heard from people that "Public Enemies" is good, and maybe I expected too much.

    The acting seemed a little stiff. Johnny Depp's Dillinger was charming, determined, and slightly obsessed with certain ideas (protecting and taking care of his own was one of them). For some reason he just didn't manage to be as smooth and charming as I expected him to be. Christian Bale's Purvis was actually even worse; Bale isn't the smoothest of guys most of the time, but here it was as if someone had stuck a metal rod up along his spine. He had his moments, but they were too few. All in all the characters were introduced very poorly and aside from the main faces, it was hard to keep up.

    There were some extremely funny moments, most of them with Dillinger. The plot in and on itself was on the border of spinning out of control, though; it wasn't very smooth, there was no clear pace in it, and when you thought you would be allowed to breathe for a moment, that didn't last for very long.

    When you thought the movie was going to end, it just kept pushing forward. The end was bittersweet and simple, which I liked. Life tends to be that way, after all.

    The soundtrack shone with its absence in most scenes. The gunfire, on the other hand, was almost disturbing; it was loud, and I'm sure it sounded pretty real, but for some reason it just felt like 'too much'. The shaky style of camera work also added to the chaos of not knowing who was who and what was really going on. Faces and names kept flying along with the bullets, agendas were thrown into the mix and then not mentioned again for another hour, and in the end they had a very realistic yet somewhat confusing film.

    So, looking at it like that, perhaps the story of the movie was very good, and all the other elements ate at it from the very beginning.
    Expand
  12. Dec 18, 2012
    0
    Some movies just seem bad right from the start and Public Enemies is one of them. The screenplay, acting, editing, music and the way the entire film was produced is idiotic. A typical gangster film with violence, horse racing and lots of death.
  13. Aug 31, 2012
    0
    This movie isn't worthy of any score. Horrible directing. It went from weirdly quiet to loud obnoxious gun shooting. I hate it. I could have watched a decent syfy movie for 2 hours. Instead I suffered through this disaster.
  14. Nov 16, 2013
    5
    Public Enemies is really just a biography.
    Some were disappointed with the execution of this gangster movie, but it wasn't just a "gangster movie" it was the factual biography of John Dillinger. The movie succeeds with accomplishing that aspect, but fails to be very interesting or exciting. The characters aren't very likeable although the performances are great. Just an okay movie that is
    Public Enemies is really just a biography.
    Some were disappointed with the execution of this gangster movie, but it wasn't just a "gangster movie" it was the factual biography of John Dillinger. The movie succeeds with accomplishing that aspect, but fails to be very interesting or exciting. The characters aren't very likeable although the performances are great. Just an okay movie that is a factual representation of a notorious gangster.
    Expand
Metascore
70

Generally favorable reviews - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 35
  2. Negative: 0 out of 35
  1. The film lacks the juice promised by the teaming of such extraordinary filmmakers with a cast as large as a Hooverville encampment.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    50
    Oddly, too, the film is somewhat shortchanged by its great star, Johnny Depp, who disappointingly has chosen to play Dillinger as self-consciously cool rather than earthy and gregarious.
  3. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    50
    It lacks overall focus, and at the end you may have a question for Michael Mann: Why'dyou bother? [July 6, 2009, p.59]